Multiple environmentalities and post-politicization in a Canadian Mountain Park

Abstract

This research explores the centrality of multiple environmentalities at multiple scales in the post-politicization of conservation governance in Jasper National Park, Canada. Austerity politics in Canada contributed to the post-politicization of conservation as the interests of Parks Canada and private developers were brought into alignment in terms of increasing visitation and the revenue imperative. The Parks Canada Agency, under structural pressure, employed several post-political strategies to suture the space for dissensus and debate and orchestrate the appearance of consent for the private development and management of park services. Central to these strategies were multiple (sovereign, disciplinary, and neoliberal) environmentalities constructed at multiple scales by multiple actors (the federal government, the local parks department, and private sector interests) aimed at producing environmental subjects who understand and acquiesce to the idea that ‘there is no alternative’ to a privatized conservation practice. In response, opponents attempted to mobilize an alternative environmentality, combining a social democratic critique of neoliberalism with a Romantic vision of wilderness conservation. Although opponents enrolled a sizeable number of allies, they fell short of stabilizing a liberation environmentality as several underlying points of ‘agreement’ contributed to the stabilization of post-political discourse and practice, foreclosing alternative political economies of conservation.

Biocultural nation making: Biopolitics, cultural-territorial belonging, and national protected areas

“…In addition, parks faced declining visitation, with visitor numbers falling by 15.2% from 1995 to 2007 even while the Canadian population grew (Shultis and More, 2011). In response, Parks Canada has worked to improve visitor numbers in large part through a renewed focus on tourism, marketing, and attending to what has become known as the “enhanced visitor experience” (Jager and Sanche, 2010; Rettie, 2009; Youdelis, 2019).…”

“…Critics of this policy shift have interpreted it as a neoliberal prioritization of tourism revenue at the expense of the environmental and nation building functions of parks (CPAWS, 2016; Rettie, 2009, 2017; Youdelis, 2019). Rettie (2009: 72) states, for instance, that these changes demonstrate that Canadian national parks are “under pressure to cease being sites of nationhood and natural beauty, and start being businesses.” Others have argued that the prioritization of visitation has been driven by a neoliberal commitment to austerity, small government, lower taxes, privatization, and market mechanisms (Shultis and More, 2011; Youdelis, 2019).…”

“…Critics of this policy shift have interpreted it as a neoliberal prioritization of tourism revenue at the expense of the environmental and nation building functions of parks (CPAWS, 2016; Rettie, 2009, 2017; Youdelis, 2019). Rettie (2009: 72) states, for instance, that these changes demonstrate that Canadian national parks are “under pressure to cease being sites of nationhood and natural beauty, and start being businesses.” Others have argued that the prioritization of visitation has been driven by a neoliberal commitment to austerity, small government, lower taxes, privatization, and market mechanisms (Shultis and More, 2011; Youdelis, 2019). While these criticisms indeed have merit, they overlook the extent to which Canadian parks are being re-presented as sites where national attachments are forged and through which a biologically and culturally robust, not to mention economically productive, population is fostered, both of which are intricately tied to the drive to increase visitor numbers.…”

“…Finally, the affirmative nation making of Connecting Canadians to Nature rests on a deeper exclusion. Here, the privilege of being in many of Canada’s protected areas has been made possible by the prior and ongoing displacement of Indigenous peoples, especially in the older and more nationally iconic parks like Jasper and Banff (Campbell, 2011; MacLaren, 2011; Youdelis, 2016, 2019). This is a key feature of how nations were created and continue to operate in the context of settler colonialism.…”

“…The early development of Banff was shaped by 19th-century health theories and spa culture that saw healing properties in the hot springs and surrounding environment (Johnson, 1975;Lieffers, 2013). Importantly, the creation of parks as spaces of leisure, adventure, health, colonial consolidation, and capital accumulation went hand in hand with processes of Indigenous displacement and elimination as parks were carved out of Indigenous territory (MacLaren, 2011;Sandlos, 2013;Youdelis, 2016Youdelis, , 2019.…”